The Denial of Visitation Rights: A Preliminary Look at its Incidence, Correlates, Antecedents and Consequences

The issue of visitation denial has inspired considerable debate and legislative activity. This article presents empirical evidence on the scope of the problem and the relationship between visitation and child support payment behaviors. Visitation denial is shown to be a problem, although reported levels of denial fall below both levels of non-contact by absent parents and non-payment of child support noted in previous research. Visitation difficulties appear to become established fairly early on in the separation/divorce process and fail to deviate over time. Although non-payment of child support cases do not always involve a visitation problem, the two phenomena are related with visitation problem cases being more likely to involve non-payment of child support. The data do not permit a deciphering of causal order in cases that involve both types of non-compliance. However, both phenomena appear to stem from conflict patterns between the parents which are detectable at early stages of the divorce process. These findings inspire several recommendations, including interventions with divorcing parents aimed at enhancing their communication skills and reducing levels of anger and hostility and the need to develop mechanisms in which visitation and child support grievances can be jointly aired.     

Fathers and sons: some effects of prolonged custody litigation

In all jurisdictions, for a variety of reasons, child custody and visitation issues may be reopened at any time. The children at issue, already likely to have been traumatized by problems in the parental marriage and subsequent separation and divorce, are affected further by still more litigation. The cases of three preadolescent boys who are the subjects of such prolonged litigation are presented. In each, the boys resided with their mothers as the primary custodial parents, the fathers having generally liberal rights of visitation. Regardless of which parent raised further court-related issues after the original agreements, the father-son relationship was most severely affected by continuing legal actions and related parental actions. Each child became increasingly fearful of the next anticipated visit by the father, who was cast into the role of villain by the child. Efforts to improve these damaged relationships through joint parent-child therapeutic attempts were largely of little avail. In spite of what may have been good experience with the person of the judge who dealt with earlier litigation, the children became fearful of what the next might be like or might do, viewing the judge as the person in power to whom parents and attorneys alike deferred. It is suggested that, wherever possible, prolonged litigation be avoided in the best interests of the child and of preserving necessary child-parent relationships.     

TURNING OFFENDERS INTO RESPONSIBLE PARENTS AND CHILD SUPPORT PAYERS*

This article describes four demonstration projects that strive to promote responsible behavior with respect to parenting, child support payment, and employment among incarcerated and paroled parents with child support obligations. These projects, conducted in Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Texas, with support from the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement and evaluated by the Center for Policy Research, led to a number of common outcomes and lessons. The projects revealed that inmates want help with child support, parenting, and employment and that prisons can be effective settings in which to conduct such interventions. Family reintegration programs were popular with inmates and may have helped to avoid the rupture of parent–child relationships commonly associated with incarceration. Although employment is the key to child support payment following release, rates of postrelease employment and earnings at all project sites were low and the employment programs were of limited utility in helping released offenders find jobs. Agencies dealing with child support, employment, and criminal justice need to adopt more effective policies with incarcerated parents including transitional job programs that guarantee immediate, subsidized employment upon release, child support guidelines that adjust for low earnings, and better training and education opportunities during incarceration.     

EFFECTS OF FATHER AND MOTHER PARENTING ON CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH IN HIGH‐ AND LOW‐CONFLICT DIVORCES

This article studied the relations of children's mental health problems to the warmth of their relationship with their noncustodial father and custodial mother and the level of conflict between the parents. Using a sample of 182 divorcing families, multiple regression was used to test the independent effect of father warmth, mother warmth, and interparental conflict. Results indicated that father warmth and mother warmth were both independently related to lower child‐externalizing problems. However, the relations between mother and child warmth and child‐internalizing problems were different as a function of interparental conflict and level of warmth with the other parent. Implications for court practices and policies are discussed.     

COPARENTING ARRANGEMENTS IN A JURISDICTION WITH STATUTORY GUIDELINES

Some states have recently moved away from the traditional winner-loser model of child custody to one focused on coparenting. Under the old approach, divorce decrees typically "awarded" custody to one parent while relegating the other to a "visitor" with poorly defined status. The new system is premised on the child's need for a continuing relationship with both parents and promotes this goal by upgrading the noncustodial parent's status and time-share, assigning substantive rights and responsibilities to both parents. To give effect to the shared parenting idea, Texas adopted joint custody and statutory visitation guidelines legislatively. The policy covers all major aspects of parental rights and duties with great specificity (not just child support, for which all states must have guidelines). It applies equally to divorce and paternity cases. Judges are authorized to deviate from standard visitation guidelines but must state a rationale for doing so on request. Parties may also negotiate and agree to arrangements at variance with the guidelines, subject to approval by the court. This article describes the statutory regime in Texas and its implementation in the family court system. Based on a sample of divorce and paternity cases in the state's largest jurisdiction, it documents innovative court interventions and a wide array of coparenting and support arrangements.     

UNDERSTANDING DISTRESSED FATHERS' PERCEPTIONS OF LEGAL AND RELATIONAL INEQUITIES POSTDIVORCE

This study examines distressed fathers' perceptions of inequity about their experiences related to the divorce process, custody, visitation, and child support. A content analysis of men's subjective responses to an open-ended survey question revealed dissatisfactions with the legal system and emotional hardships associated with divorce. Fathers expressed strong negative feelings about discrimination from the legal system. Relational inequities centered around the ex-wife and her perceived responsibility for problems with the courts and relationships with children.     

A NEW LOOK AT AN OLD ISSUE:

In 1997, the Office of Child Support Enforcement initiated the State Child Access and Visitation (AV) Grant Program, which involves annual awards of $10 million to states to promote the development of programs to alleviate access problems. Telephone interviews with 970 parents who used mediation, parent education, and supervised visitation programs funded by AV grants in nine states revealed that the programs are reaching diverse groups of parents including many low-income, non-White, and unmarried parents who receive no other type of access assistance. The programs also appear to be achieving the major objectives posited for them by the federal government. One-third to one-half of noncustodial parents in every program type reported that parent–child contact increased following program participation, with supervised visitation users who typically had the lowest levels of parent–child contact reporting a significant increase in the number of days of contact. A review of child support records for 173 program users in three states revealed that child support payments increased among participants following program participation, especially for never-married parents who paid a significantly higher proportion of what they owed. These findings are similar to results reported in a five-state study of mediation programs funded by AV grants that was conducted by the Office of the Inspector General. However, both studies have some serious limitations, including low response rates and the absence of a nontreatment comparison group.     

HOW JUDGES DECIDE WHETHER SOCIAL PARENTS HAVE PARENTAL RIGHTS: A FIVE‐FACTOR TYPOLOGY

Courts have issued conflicting rulings regarding the rights (e.g., custody, visitation) and responsibilities (e.g., child support) of non‐biological gay parents. This analysis establishes a typology of five factors that most commonly influence judges' decisions. These factors include: interpretation of parenting statutes, legislative intent, parental intent, legal documents establishing parenthood, and the child's best interests. Despite these common themes, there is still much discrepancy among court rulings. Based on this analysis, there are steps parents can take to protect their legal rights and living arrangements. Finally, policy suggestions are offered for courts and lawmakers. These legal actors can take steps (e.g., clarifying statutes) that would provide certainty for families in case of parental separation or the biological parent's death.     

Young Children in Divorce and Separation: Pilot Study of a Mediation‐Based Co‐Parenting Intervention

This article reports on a cluster randomized pilot study of a mediation‐based intervention for separated parents of very young children, Young Children in Divorce and Separation (YCIDS). The control group intervention was “Mediation plus Reading.” Participants were separated parents attending mediation over a co‐parenting dispute concerning a child under the age of 5 years (n=33 cases). Nine of the 16 key child and parent outcomes were significantly better for the intervention group, with the remainder nonsignificant between groups. Mediators reported 35 per cent lower referral on to legal action for YCIDS cases following mediation. Implementation complexities of the YCIDS program led to the development of an online intervention format, now the subject of a further study. Further implications of this pilot study are discussed.     

The Effects of Joint Legal Custody on Mothers,Fathers, and Children Controlling for Factors That Predispose a Sole Maternal versus Joint Legal Award

Findings from comparisons of joint and sole custody families that do not control for predivorce differences in demographic and family process variables (factors that may predispose families to choose or be awarded joint custody) are of limited generalizability, since obtained group differences may be attributable to predisposing (self-selection) factors, custody, or both. This study compared a random sample of 254 recently separated, not-yet-divorced families on 71 predivorce variables that might plausibly differentiate between families awarded joint legal versus sole maternal custody. Twenty such factors were identified and controlled for in subsequent comparisons of 52 sole maternal and 26 joint legal custody families 2 years postdivorce. Families with joint custody had more frequent father–child visitation, lower maternal satisfaction with custody arrangements, more rapid maternal repartnering, and fewer child adjustment problems (net of predivorce selection factors). Moreover, these effects did not appear to be moderated by level of predecree parental conflict. No association between custody and fathers' compliance with child support orders was obtained.     

Online Virtual Supervised Visitation During the COVID‐19 Pandemic: One State's Experience

This paper describes how supervised visitation programs in Florida rapidly transitioned from in‐person supervised visits to virtual, online visits during the COVID‐19 pandemic to protect the health of families and staff. Structured telephonic interviews and an online survey revealed that although most program directors had not previously developed guiding policies or hosted such visits, within weeks they were providing hundreds of online “virtual visits” between children and their non‐custodial parents to maintain the crucial parent–child relationship in a safe manner. Vignettes from this data provide lessons regarding parent and child reactions to virtual visits, advantages and disadvantages of virtual visits from the programs' perspectives, and levels of enthusiasm for using virtual visits going forward. In addition, the data includes recommendations for new program guidelines and protocols for the ongoing use of virtual visits. Although it is too early to call these policies best practices, the study does offer insight into the challenges and opportunities afforded by virtual visits and can inform disaster planning that supervised visitation programs develop to prepare for inevitable future disruptions in services to families.     

Judicial Oversight of Parental Visitation in Family Reunification Cases

This article explores the issue of visitation between a child and parents in the context of child protection proceedings, addressing the following areas: 1) the importance of visitation in the context of family reunification; 2) the results of an informal study of visitation practices in several jurisdictions; 3) the law relating to visitation in child protection proceedings; 4) some best practices that have been identified by commentators; 5) the role of the judge regarding visitation issues; and 6) some recommendations for judges and court systems regarding visitation. The article concludes that visitation between a child and her parents often occurs too infrequently; as a result, the relationship between the child and parents can be damaged, the child can suffer further trauma, and the chances for successful family reunification may be reduced. Finally, judges and social service agencies can and must improve both the quality and quantity of parent‐child visitation.     

Relitigation after contested custody and visitation evaluations

Relitigation of custody, visitation, and child support during a two-year period was used as a measure of postdivorce adjustment. A sample of highly adversarial families (n = 58) referred for a court-ordered psychiatric evaluation as part of a contested divorce custody or visitation action was compared to control samples of mother custody (n = 43), father custody (n = 30), and joint custody (n = 54) families in which custody was not contested. Nineteen percent of adversarial families evaluated predivorce relitigated custody, a significantly higher rate than control families. Mother custody cases had a higher rate of relitigation over child support than did father or joint custody arrangements. Joint custody controls had approximately the same rate of relitigation of custody as did father custody and mother custody controls. A sample of families referred for evaluation of a postdivorce custody or visitation dispute (n = 46) had a higher rate of relitigation of problems regarding visitation than did a control sample of postdivorce families (n = 36). Possible explanations for these findings are discussed.     

Unintended and Unavoidable: The Failure to Protect Rule and Its Consequences for Undocumented Parents and Their Children

Parents without immigration status in the United States regularly face the threat of deportation and separation from their children. When an undocumented parent is brought to the attention of law enforcement through the child welfare system, they also face the potential of the loss of legal custodial rights to their children. The child welfare system and immigration enforcement mechanisms operate independent of one another with little regard for how actions in one can impact a parent's legal rights in the other, often permanently separating children from their parents. This article examines the particular issue of undocumented parents who are charged with the failure to protect their children from witnessing or otherwise experiencing abuse committed by a third party. It explores how such a charge, whether founded or unfounded, can result in loss of eligibility for immigration relief to which the undocumented parent would otherwise be entitled, as well as deportation of the parent and permanent separation of parent and child. These issues are situated within the larger context of the normative guideposts of both family and immigration law, namely, the best interests of the child and family unity. It identifies issues for further academic inquiry as well as tips for practitioners who may represent undocumented parents in either the family or immigration systems.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Learn about the potential consequences under family law and immigration law when an undocumented parent's child is abused by a third party
• Gain strategies for planning with undocumented parents to avoid the loss of the custody of their children in the event of a sudden deportation
• Be able to identify and address particular concerns for clients who are undocumented victims of domestic violence

     

MANY YEARS AFTER THE PARENTAL ABDUCTION

Little longitudinal data are available on what happens to families in which there has been a parental abduction. This article reports on information on 48 families who have been followed for a number of years after the recovery of a missing child. It focuses on questions relevant to the courts: the use of mediation services preabduction, contact between the abductor and the children and the abductor and the searching parent, the payment of child support and restitution for the search, the legal ramifications to the abductor, and the preparations parents took to prevent another abduction.     

A COMPELLING NEED FOR MANDATED USE OF SUPERVISED VISITATION PROGRAMS

Courts are frequently confronted by circumstances that do not justify termination of all contact with a parent, yet present legitimate concerns regarding the physical, emotional, or mental health of the child. Supervised visitation programs afford such parents and their children the opportunity to preserve the emotionally vital parent-child relationship while protecting the child, and sometimes the other parent, from harm. As the number of children deemed to be at risk continues to rise, demand for supervised visitation services steadily exceeds supply. This article proposes that all states should make supervised visitation programs universally available by enacting legislation that provides for their creation, regulation, and funding, together with clearly defined guidelines that mandate participation in supervised visitation programs whenever specific risk factors are present.     

SUPERVISED VISITATION: A CALL FOR A SECOND GENERATION OF RESEARCH

With the divorce rate rising and related child visitation disputes becoming an increasingly difficult issue before the courts, supervised visitation programs have proliferated over the last decade. The literature demonstrates that ongoing contact between children and both parents following separation and/or divorce is important for children's socio‐emotional adjustment and positive child/parent relations. However, there is a paucity of literature demonstrating a relationship between supervised visitation programs and child/parent relationship outcomes. Based on the lack of outcome research the authors argue for a second generation of research regarding intended and unintended consequences of supervised visitation. This article reviews and synthesizes the current literature, highlighting strengths, limitations, significant findings and proposes a critical need for evidence‐based research.     

MANDATORY VISITATION

The term visitation rights connotes that noncutodial parents have the discretion, not the responsibility, to visit their children. This article examines the assertion that visitation rights should instead be viewed as an obligation owed by noncustodial parents to their children. Excluding circumstances in which visitation would be injurious to a child, the expectation of visitation should be enforced by the courts.     

Forgotten Children of Immigration and Family Law: How The Absence of Legal Aid Affects Children in the United States

The absence of government‐appointed legal counsel in immigration proceedings adversely affects large numbers of children in the United States. Children born in the United States to parents without citizenship status (U.S.‐born children of noncitizen parents or UCNP) are harmed by a parent's detention and removal. Unaccompanied alien children (UAC) who have entered the country without legal status are adversely affected by their own detention and removal. The possibility of obtaining relief from removal is drastically diminished by the lack of legal representation. Currently UAC and immigrant parents are not entitled to court‐appointed attorneys. Any meaningful change in immigration law, such as a federal statutory amendment to provide UAC and immigrant parents with government‐appointed counsel is unlikely due to the present political dissension in Congress regarding this issue. Because UAC and immigrant parents are not entitled to government‐funded legal representation, a pro bono legal service system has developed, but is unable to meet the present need adequately. For immigrant parents, this Note proposes the adoption of a statute to allow the appointment of court liaisons in family court proceedings. The court liaison is a nonattorney who is familiar with the processes of the family court and ensures that immigrant parents are fully informed regarding all pertinent family court proceedings. For UAC, this Note proposes an amendment to the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act to mandate the appointment of a child advocate to all UAC. The child advocate is not a lawyer, but works with the UAC's attorney to provide the child with legal representation and advocacy.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• UCNP confront the loss of parents to detention and removal. Children are condemned to limbo, torn between absent biological parents and placement in foster care.
• The recent surge in the number of UAC who enter the United States by crossing the border from Mexico has been described as a humanitarian crisis. These children often remain alone without legal protection, vulnerable to detention and removal.
• Ideally, UAC and the immigrant parents would be provided with government‐funded legal representation in immigration proceedings. In the absence of the federal statutory reform necessary to make that a reality, state statutory reform to allow for the provision of court liaison programs for immigrant parents and federal statutory reform to allow the appointment of child advocates for UAC can begin to offer children and families needed legal support and advocacy.